Diane Abbott Has Labour Whip Suspended

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

Not that I'm a fan, but I don't believe Diane Abbott is anti semitic. 

 

This is more of Starmer's crusade against socialists in the Labour party, not to mention an assault on free speech.

I tend to agree with you on that point.

Unfortunately,  she leaves herself wide open to Starmer because she tends to speak first and think afterwards.

She has been dropping herself into it for a number of years now without learning from her mistakes but, I also think that neither her or Jeremy Corbyn are anti semitic.

There is too much of the widespread reaction when anyone even mentions Jewish people, no matter what their intentions or what they are trying to say.

 

[Jack Grey]

10 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

I tend to agree with you on that point.

Unfortunately,  she leaves herself wide open to Starmer because she tends to speak first and think afterwards.

She has been dropping herself into it for a number of years now without learning from her mistakes but, I also think that neither her or Jeremy Corbyn are anti semitic.

There is too much of the widespread reaction when anyone even mentions Jewish people, no matter what their intentions or what they are trying to say.

 

Yeah I'm a little uncomfortable with the fact that anyone that criticises a Jewish person or the Jewish people are antisemitic

 

I know the Jews haven't been treated that great but not everyone is perfect either

 

No one should be exempt from criticism regardless of history 

[Anna B]

1 hour ago, Jack Grey said:

Actually there is no law that says you can't cause offence

 

Not yet anyway. ...I know there are certain people who stupidly want to bring in those laws 

 

But at the moment no one has the right not to be offended 

 

Diane Abbott can say what she likes....what is questionable is has she breached a code of conduct 

 

So that's work related she's not broken the law 

Except for the ill-defined 'Hate crime' which can be applied to just about anything that someone says, that someone else doesn't like.

It's the start of a very slippery slope....

 

When does a simple phrase become so 'offensive' it can lose you your job,

and when be classified as  a 'hate crime?' 

 

Beware the thought police...

 

Edited April 25, 2023 by Anna B

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Anna B said:

Except for the ill-defined 'Hate crime' which can be applied to just about anything that people say that someone else doesn't like.

It's the start of a very slippery slope....

 

When does a simple phrase become so 'offensive' it can lose you your job,

and when be classified as  a 'hate crime.' 

 

Beware the thought police...

 

This law was introduced because certain fringe groups asked for it, was rushed in to satisfy them, which resulted in the lack of clarity within it.

[Jack Grey]

3 minutes ago, Anna B said:

Except for the ill-defined 'Hate crime' which can be applied to just about anything that people say that someone else doesn't like.

It's the start of a very slippery slope....

 

When does a simple phrase become so 'offensive' it can lose you your job,

and when be classified as  a 'hate crime.' 

 

Beware the thought police...

 

Well there was that guy who got sacked for flying a banner that said "White Lives Matter"

 

And a guy was convicted for teaching his pug dog to do a nazi salute

 

People are getting arrested for saying that trans women are not women on Twitter

[sheffbag]

21 hours ago, Organgrinder said:

After all that waiting for Anna, you don't seem to have many pearls of wisdom to pass onto her.

She,  like you,, and everyone else, is fully entitled to however many obsessions she wishes.

Would you argue with that.

 

I believe it's right that she had the whip removed.

how bored must you have been yesterday to go looking for posts that had nothing to do with you and offer absolutely nothing to my question to Anna as i hadnt asked for your opinion.

 

But at least you replied unlike Anna

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, sheffbag said:

how bored must you have been yesterday to go looking for posts that had nothing to do with you and offer absolutely nothing to my question to Anna as i hadnt asked for your opinion.

 

But at least you replied unlike Anna

You were trying to bully and ridicule Anna.

Why not pick on someone like me instead.

On a public forum,  these are not private conversations and anyone can answer so it has everything to do with me, and anyone else who cared to reply.

I also answered your question.

I will repeat that, any "obsession" of Anna's, or anyone else's,  is nothing to do with you and they don't need your approval.

Neither is anyone bound by any rule to answer your questions.  It is a free and open public forum.

 

 

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Organgrinder said:

You were trying to bully and ridicule Anna.

Why not pick on someone like me instead.

On a public forum,  these are not private conversations and anyone can answer so it has everything to do with me, and anyone else who cared to reply.

I also answered your question.

I will repeat that, any "obsession" of Anna's, or anyone else's,  is nothing to do with you and they don't need your approval.

Neither is anyone bound by any rule to answer your questions.  It is a free and open public forum.

 

 

Strange - when I respond to topics, you invariably tell me to 'get back on topic'. I'd try applying the same rule to yourself.

[Al Bundy]

23 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

Strange - when I respond to topics, you invariably tell me to 'get back on topic'. I'd try applying the same rule to yourself.

Same old thing.

 

The left are too busy twisting about anything and everything that they forget what they were complaining about, thus tying themselves into a barrel full of knots only veteran sailor would be proud of.

[sheffbag]

40 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

You were trying to bully and ridicule Anna.

Why not pick on someone like me instead.

On a public forum,  these are not private conversations and anyone can answer so it has everything to do with me, and anyone else who cared to reply.

I also answered your question.

I will repeat that, any "obsession" of Anna's, or anyone else's,  is nothing to do with you and they don't need your approval.

Neither is anyone bound by any rule to answer your questions.  It is a free and open public forum.

 

 

I dont need to bully or ridicule Anna, you could argue by the tone of the majority of your replies (GET BACK ON TOPIC, DONT DISTRACT) for example in the "why vote labour in may" are bullying tactics so please be respectful

 

i have no need to "pick on you", i dont "pick" on anyone but if you loko at my original quote i asked anna a question based on a post that in my opinion was challengable. same as you have with mine

 

there are many instances where a poster will ask another poster a question and they will reply. I have debated with Anna a lot of the years, mainly over her blind obsession that anything to do with Corbyn and his crew can do no wrong but i respect her right to her opinion and her steadfast belief in that and ive told her that.

 

you on the other hand come across as a self rightious troll quite a lot in your post trying to deflect conversation or insult people for example from your last set of posts

"I watch the news BBC or SKY each breakfast, lunch, evening and late night every day without fail, and have not seen or heard any of the figures you have quoted. My theory is still that your figures are guesswork and to be taken with a pinch of salt (as are most of the things you say)." - 

 

"A poor contribution again. What is this supposed to mean? Another way to prove that you don't have an argument presumably. Not very sharp for an axe"

"A poor contribution Firstly, you never ever had any credibility"

"So you still have nothing to say then except more of the same"

"I consider "complete and utter buffoons" to be lazy words too and in no way, a proper argument on the subject under discussion. Try and think of something to say."

"Another poor contribution from you. You obviously can't think of anything to say."

 

And thats just a small example of how you post trying to belittle people or claim superior knowledge with no consideration for that fact that your knowledge, no matter how good it may, or may not be, trumps anyone else's on here

 

Feel free to report me if you dont like what ive posted (even though i am only quoting your own words) or feel free to reply with GET BACK ON TOPIC as you did in the vote Labour  thread as if you were running the thread or discussion

 

Cant have it both ways